|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:08 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
The feminist establishment without a doubt includes the Washington Post. If I could be bothered to read their BS, I guess I would find out what they do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 08:08 PM October 22nd, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
How much more evidence is needed to push for impeachment of The Shrub?
He nominates his secret blow-job girlfriend for the Supreme Court?
This is not a president.
He is a fiction.
A cartoon character.
Your tax dollars are already assigned to pay for his retirement.
And Saddam is on trial?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:01 AM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
It's great - the conservatives hate this harpy because a) she isn't qualified and b) she's clearly not far enough out in right field for them. Seems to be a consensus on this from the right of center.
Then you cut to the Democrats and other left-leaning types, who should HATE her, what with her evangelical roots, anti-abortion stance, etc. etc.
But of course not. Everyone on the left just loves this conservative, insanely religious woman. Because she's a woman - no other qualifications required. It's like when the feminists wanted OJ tarred and feathered - but only after they decided that being black wasn't enough to counter violence against women. Never mind about whether he did it or not, just decide which ideological stance justifies your preconceptions: violence against all women who are all victims, or his being a member of a minority, whom they should automatically support, since they over-identify with them as fellow "victims" of evil white male oppression (which many minorities are, but women as the majority clearly are NOT). Of course, their inherent selfishness came through loud and clear - kill him! He might have been violent to a woman! No trial, just straight to the lynching.
Does anyone else have any questions about why a woman can NEVER be allowed to even fill in as President temporarily in the good old US of A?
Just to be clear, I'll answer that question before the feminista trolls can pitch their hissy fits. Can a woman be President?
An American woman? Not on your life.
A woman outside the "anglosphere"/Scandanavia? Absolutely, if she's qualified. Isreal, the Phillipines, etc. seem to have made out extremely well with female leaders, although India's communist girls have fixed it so it's a crime for men to commit adultery but not when their wives do it, and they arranged it so men pay higher tax RATES than women, because women are so hard done by as a victim class, you see... Someone will have to explain dowry laws and 498A to me clearly, as I don't fully appreciate it yet - it does sound like it absolutely sucks to be an Indian (i.e. East Indian) man. There's that ol' English influence again.
See, men EVERYWHERE look out for women AND men, always have and always will - it's the way we're programmed biologically. We generally would choose to protect and support women and children. Unless forced to - that's another matter entirely. My stance on this is pretty simple. You can have alimony and child support when you claw it from my cold, dead hands, bitch! Stick around, act like a reasonable human being and don't attack me or the kids, and you're covered for life.
Women in North America and large areas of Europe, however, believe in the "frontman fallacy", that since men have "all the power" (that's a laugh), we must think like they do and only look out for other men - something only a woman's greedy, warped brain could muster. Then the victim/oppressed routine begins, and self-serving lies are used to justify any woman in a position of power looking out exclusively for the girls, and to justify the expectation that any MAN in power should do the same, since we're clearly all in it just for ourselves, right ladies? Women threaten to vote out any man who doesn't pander to them, so clearly the vast majority of women, not just "feminists", only care about women, whereas men vote on issues and the candidate's qualifications. The men in power have been giving away the farm to women for hundreds of years, yet these women to whom we pander continue to bleat about how we're only looking out for men. Since they think in this twisted and selfish way, they assume we do too.
Selfish hags.
This is why no American, Canadian, British or (in general) Scandanavian woman should EVER be elected to a position of power. She will only look out for her poor, oppressed sisters in victimhood, ignoring the productive 49% of the population that PAYS for everything. When women get off their fat, lazy, selfish asses and condescend to pull their own weight and treat men as human beings AND agree to look out for men as carefully as men look out for them, THEN AND ONLY THEN will they be qualified to hold office.
Ichabod
(sorry in advance if I'm stepping on someone's nick here, but I don't register for nothin'!...)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:30 PM October 24th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
You're full of catshit. Liberals and left-of center folks DO NOT LIKE Meirs because she is a woman. That's moronic and unjustified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:40 PM October 24th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
I don't even understand what you're bitching about. I said that the left likes Mz. Meirs because she has a vagina, and those same left-of-center folks who whinge in favor of feminism at every chance don't seem to care that she would jump all over "women's rights". She's a woman, so they automatically approve.
So, are you agreeing? Disagreeing? Or did you just manage a triple negative? Do clarify, please. I'm so very curious to hear more of your eloquent discussion.
Whatever you're smoking, please lay off it, it's causing brain damage.
Ichabod
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:30 PM October 23rd, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Women should not have the right to vote or hold office anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:12 PM October 24th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Great, why don't you go start up your own country that believes in that sort of thing.
Here in America there are people fighting for REAL equality.
Good luck with your anti-female country.
(Actually I hope once you get it established, an Earth quake knocks you all in to the ocean...)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Wonder what the feminist establishment will do with